Human rights are those rights that all people have (or should have, or are believed to have) as humans.

Unfortunately, no consensus can be reached as to what constitutes human rights. Many non-Western countries have said that trying to impose Western concepts of human rights (such as freedom of religion or political rights) is an act of colonialism. Instead, many of them say that Western ideology does not give enough thought to rights such as clothing, stability, and work.

Contents

The concept of human rights emerged from Enlightenment-era thinkers' (and revolutionaries) ideas about "natural rights" and the "rights of man." This was mainly a reaction to absolutist monarchism, the divine right of kings, and religious oppression. The inviolability of the human body became a central concept in human rights, especially after Voltaire's campaign to overturn the verdict against Jean Calas, the FrenchCalvinist framed for murder.[3][4]

While some states (notably Virginia) passed declarations of rights prior to 1789, the first attempt to pass a "canon" of human rights was made almost simultaneously in the US and France with the "Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen" of August 1789 and the (slightly later) American "Bill of Rights" (i.e. the first ten amendments to the US constitution) which became law by 1791 after being approved by Congress in September of 1789. To a large degree all subsequent declarations of human rights (as well as many constitutions) draw significant inspiration from either or both of those declarations.[5]

Given that different cultures give differing weights to what is or is not a human right the United Nations set forth to reach consensus and, in 1948 in the aftermath of World War II proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Of the 56 participating countries there were no dissenters although there were eight abstentions.

There are 30 'Articles'[6] although not each of these directly equates to a right. In brief - and heavily paraphrased - the rights are:

Naturally this attempt to reach consensus has its critics. In brief these can be summed up as

Objections to freedom of religion. This is counter to some religious beliefs - "thou shall not suffer a witch to live" for example.

Objections to gender equality - again often on religious grounds.

Objections by libertarians about the social contract - to quote "Enforcement of one person's economic, social, or cultural rights necessarily involves forcing others to relinquish their property, or to use it in a way prescribed by the enforcers."[31]

Objections based on national sovereignty. (Translation: "United Nations, you are not the boss of us!") While this objection is perhaps the most transparently childish, it (or its undeclared implementation) is also perhaps the most effective, given that any sort of real enforcement action by/on behalf of the UN must be approved by the Security Council, and the right of permanent members of that body to exercise a veto on any of its resolutions means that many nations are effectively shielded from the possibility of being required to comply with the UDHR or other international obligations.